New Paragraph

What did the PM’s most recent announcement on border security really mean?
February 4, 2025

Is there any meat to this or is it more of the same?

U.S. President Trump seemed relatively pleased with the commitments PM Trudeau made in their phone conversation on Feb 3rd. From a tariff war perspective, that’s a good thing. I don’t think that Trump really gives a tinker’s damn about the minute amount of Fentanyl that is shipped into the U.S. from Canada, or the handful of illegal aliens that sneak into the U.S. from the north – versus the thousands of illegals and tons of fentanyl that enters the U.S. from Mexico. He simply doesn’t like Justin Trudeau and is therefore swinging his economic hammer in an attempt to ruin him politically, and subsequently we pay the price as a nation.


But let’s examine the reality of PM Trudeau’s announcement:



Move ahead with its $1.3 billion border plan announced in December

Yup, got it. Old news. $1.3B over six years. I recall every word of it and none of it means boots on the ground.


List cartels as terrorists

Big whoop. They are already organized crime groups and police and the courts have legislation to deal with them from investigative and sentencing perspectives. If Canada’s terrorism legislation helps, great, but in essence Canada is changing the definition of ‘terrorism’ if they are going to now call armed thugs that manufacture drugs and transport them around the world ‘terrorists’. I don’t really care one way or the other, but it is not an earth-shattering development in my view.


Reinforcing the border with new choppers, technology and personnel

Okay. Old news but still makes sense. In the meantime, they rented two Blackhawk warships that’ll spend as much time on the ground being serviced than flying in the skies over 5000 miles of border, 24/7. The rest of the RCMP is already short of aviation assets to meet their current policing needs nationally, but on we go.


Enhanced coordination with our American partners

In Ontario, Michigan and New York State, the RCMP and OPP already have officers imbedded in several U.S. ports of entry to facilitate cross border intelligence sharing and cross-border investigations. Could there be more of this across Canada? Absolutely.


Increased resources to stop the flow of fentanyl

What? There are no ‘people’ to do this. He’ll be looking for the RCMP and CBSA to redeploy officers. Neither agency has the human resources to do this. The RCMP are already short at least 1000 officers for their Federal Policing Program (which includes narcotics investigations) and they are desperately hurting for officers in many provinces. CBSA are short at least 2000 agents just to meet their current needs without an enhanced border security framework that extends beyond the Ports of Entry.


Nearly 10,000 frontline personnel are and will be working on protecting the border

Name them! CBSA has 8500 front line agents working at the various Ports of Entry. This number of 10,000 must include them, the handful of RCMP officers they can claim are committed to border security across the country and probably the 200 the OPP has at least temporarily assigned to help, in the interests of the safety of all Ontario communities. All of that is a shell game at best.


Appointing a Fentanyl Czar

And who will be anointed? It has to be someone with a strong and current law enforcement background as opposed to a politician. It should be a ‘Drug Czar’ and not one with a Fentanyl specific portfolio, and perhaps the role should simply belong to the RCMP executive that commands the Federal Policing program.


The other reality is, Canada could have a dozen Fentanyl Czars, but there is no one for them to command. He/she will be a General without an army. All police services conduct drug investigations already, 24/7, 365, including Fentanyl cases. Most police services put all the resources they possibly can into dismantling drug manufacturers and traffickers, and include money laundering investigators in their efforts. They don’t need a Czar to confuse their command and control structures. They just need more people to do what they already do very well. And then they need a sufficient number of Federal Prosecutors to ensure hard-fought cases aren’t tossed because of the lack of a Crown Attorney. I won’t bother getting into our catch and release judicial system.


Signed a new intelligence directive on organized crime and fentanyl and we will be backing it with $200 million

I don’t have a clue what that means. Canada has an organized crime intelligence structure in Canada that is second to none. Every province has a Criminal Intelligence Service Bureau, which are linked to the Criminal Intelligence Service Canada (CISC). The provincial Bureaus are directed by committees of police leaders. CISC is commanded by a senior RCMP officer. The U.S. do not have a structure that remotely compares. These Bureaus gather, analyze and share intelligence through and with municipal, First Nations, provincial police services and the RCMP, as well as CBSA, CSIS and more member agencies. They also help fund joint forces investigations into organized crime groups – including money laundering and narcotics of all types.


Additionally, they have long established links to the FBI, Homeland Security and the ATF.


So, what changes on the intelligence front with this announcement? Does the PM intend to direct them as to who or what group to gather intelligence on?


Launch a Canada- U.S. Joint Strike Force to combat organized crime, fentanyl and money laundering

Sounds good. It happens intermittently now on a case-by-case basis, but a permanent structure would certainly be better. It doesn’t require the direction of the PM however. The Mounties should be the lead from the Canada side and be the link to all police services here as well as CISC, but once again it requires warm bodies.


Don’t get me wrong, ANYTHING that is done to improve what we are failing so badly at now is a good thing. But this announcement is more political smoke and mirrors than it is meaningful. Theres no meat on the bones here. It also drives me to distraction that it takes the irrational threats and lies of a petulant child from the most powerful bully pulpit on earth to force an elementary start at doing what we should have been doing for years.


When Canada announces a strategy to hire thousands of additional officers for both the RCMP and CBSA, that’ll mean were actually serious. I wait with bated breath.

Self defense in your own home: It’s bigger than fight or comply

By Chris Lewis • September 8, 2025
There are always many rapidly changing dynamics

The worst boss: Nightmare for some, reality for many

By Chris Lewis • June 21, 2025
Image: new-manager-training.com Imagine this scenario if you will, getting the worst boss on earth – a person who is the total antithesis of leadership. Your new “Boss” replaces a leader that wasn’t always right and was getting too old to meet the mental and physical demands of the job, but at the same time treated all those around him with respect. He tried to select people for key positions based on their experience base and his confidence that they may not always agree but the individuals picked would be honest with him, other employees and the client base. He undoubtedly made mistakes here and there and did have some flaws but would readily admit to most of them. This boss comes back to the organization having committed a list of publicly confirmed misdeeds and illegal acts – many of which would have singularly been a good reason to not hire even the lowest level of employee, and justification for imprisonment for others. However, he was chosen for the top job despite all that baggage. Conversely, he brings not one redeeming quality to the top position. From day one, it’s obvious that the new Boss is truly a “boss” and not a “leader.” He has old personal scores to settle and wreaks revenge on many employees that he doesn’t like. Not because they were dishonest, incapable or lazy, but because he perceives that they didn’t want him to return or didn’t always agree with his philosophies and rash actions during past affiliations. This activity causes panic among all employees who know they have no choice but to get aboard his out-of-control train or perish beneath it. Then – without any deep evaluation or thought, he makes tremendous cuts to many organizational programs – leaving thousands without work and lacking any strategy to provide much needed services to a vast array of client groups. He viciously cuts through the organization like a chainsaw through softwood. Why? Because he can. Some of these decisions may have had some degree of validity following a proper assessment, while others not, but that analysis never occurred. Most previous positive relationships with partner agencies and the majority of client groups are immediately scuttled by the new boss. He publicly demeans and taunts longtime allies with irrational statements and outright falsehoods. Never in the many decades of history of the organization has such broad-ranging international indignation been felt, largely as a result of his childish behavior. Very few productive relationships remain and although some new ones are developed, they are only with organizations that are poorly considered by clients and upstanding industry players. His decisions continually fly in the face of the needs of the immense client group but more align with the personal business interests of only the Boss and his business associates – some of whom are either known despots or of questionable character. Company stocks continue to plummet as a result of his silliness. That also has a significant negative impact on the fiscal picture of partner organizations around the world. Anyone that respectfully expresses disagreement or suggests alternative decisions to the Boss, are sidelined or fired, then are ridiculed and until they become unemployable. Gas-lighting, exaggerations, denials, the passing of blame and blatant lies are his norm. He seldom speaks the truth about anyone or any situation. The sycophants he has positioned to assist in his destruction of the organization, publicly praise him for his leadership and courageous decision-making, when the majority of employees and clients know it is just flagrant butt-kissing on their part. He constantly seeks and demands praise, even for things he didn’t do, then sulks and whines when he doesn’t receive it. He falsely takes credit for the few good things that do happen but quickly passes blame when things that have his fingerprints all over them, go horribly wrong. His God-complex is resounding and worsens with each passing day. His public claims of success – before and since becoming the Boss, and assertions of being the “Greatest Boss in history”, fall flat with anyone that truly knows him. He aggressively takes advantage of anyone he can but then turns on them at the flip of a switch. No one is beyond being found at the pointy end of his meanness stick. When caught making an error, he’ll blame everyone on his “team” before accepting any criticism. In fact, he’d turn on his own children if he felt it would make him look brave or heroic, or if it would prevent him from public humiliation. He states his 24/7 lies over and over so often to make his base of lemming followers believe him, that he seemingly believes them to be factual himself. Even when he is confronted with witness testimony or audio/video of his brazen lies, he blames others for being out to get him. Being accountable when things go wrong and letting the light shine on others when they go well, is beyond his comprehension. (Can you spell “narcissistic”?) Although he doesn’t understand the business, he refuses to surround himself with people that do, given that he thinks he knows more than any of them and possibly more than anybody, anywhere, ever, since the dawn of time. Public statements he makes are often completely ridiculous and childish, causing all those around him to force plastic smiles, offer him undeserved praise and nod like pre-programmed bobbleheads. People and even affiliated organizations live in such fear of his thirst for retribution that they either cow-tow to his insanity or prepare for annihilation. He is an embarrassment internally and externally, on an international scale. No past executive has even been so blatantly self-centered, mean spirited and/or inept, nor have they ever had such a negative impact on the organization and its people. It may take decades to repair all the damage he has done. Thankfully, his employment contract is only for four years, so there may be some light at the end of the tunnel. Most of those within and those reliant on the organization, as well as friends, associates, allies internationally pray that this nightmare will end at that time. If it’s not too late, that is. Just a bad dream for some or a reality for millions of us?

What police don’t need during a crisis

By Chris Lewis • January 4, 2025
Police know how to conduct major investigations and find bad guys. Although several specific factors change from case to case, their general investigative playbook remains the same. Once some ungodly multi-victim attack occurs, in very simplistic terms: the scene is protected, and the health of the living victims is looked after. Forensic experts begin processing the crime scene. Witnesses are located and interviewed. Physical evidence is gathered. Area and witness video recordings are collected and analyzed. Victims are identified. An off-site reunification centre is established where there are multiple victims. Next of kin notifications begin. At any point – if a suspect or suspects become known, their background is gathered, and the hunt begins. They need to be apprehended before anyone else is hurt. Area law enforcement officers need to know suspect details ASAP. “Motive” is at top of mind as investigators are synthesizing all this information, whether the suspect is identified or not. Of course, establishing motive often leads to identifying the suspect, but at other times identifying the suspect helps fill in the blanks on motive. What was the initial basis of what became a murder? Was it a robbery? Could it have been a street fight gone bad? Was it simply a want or need to kill someone specific or maybe anyone at all? That’s for investigators to sort out. There is an onus to warn the public or at least tell them something, i.e. “ongoing threat”, “stay indoors”, or “no threat to public safety”. There are reporting protocols to follow. Senior officers need to be advised up the food chain as do their political masters, so everyone knows what is happening. None of that should detract investigators from doing what they do best – catching killers. But that’s when the ravenous “thirst for knowledge” and political grandstanding often take over and completely interfere with police work. The only knowledge the investigators are thirsty for in those early hours is evidence and then identifying, locating and capturing bad people. They do not need politics monopolizing their time or efforts. The New Years Day massacre in New Orleans was big. Fourteen innocent party goers were killed and dozens injured. The world wanted to know what happened and the community wanted to know if they were in danger. I absolutely get that. However, what sometimes comes with such tragedies is everyone wanting to know everything. We see it in most mass murder cases, but this was an exceptional example of the insanity surrounding such a high-profile incident. Whatever blanks weren’t immediately filled in by police officials and verified mainstream media reports, were filled in by social media. In such cases police totally lose control of the narrative as rumours, theories, falsities, conspiracy theories and “hey look at me” games take over. The political party and individual positioning in this case was nauseating. In any multi-agency response, having the leaders of those agencies at press conferences in a united front makes sense. The public needs to have confidence that the situation is in the best of hands. But where did these massive press conferences where police officials are flanked by numerous politicians come from? I can see some elected leaders being present when a new program is launched or government funding is being announced, but it should never be in the early hours of a mass murder. Having a bunch of partisan wonks peacocking on stage and in follow-up interviews, helps no one at the operational level. As some of them were speaking, I was responding to their dumb questions in my mind: Was it a terror attack? Maybe, but let the experts figure that out. In the meantime, it’s a mass murder. Was the killer an illegal immigrant? Let’s worry about that when the dust settles. What political party is to blame for allowing him into the country? We don’t care. Maybe he was born here. Let’s sort that out if he turns out to be an illegal immigrant. Why wasn’t the area more secure? Good question for a future debrief. We need to get the FBI and HSI leaders before a government committee right away so we can find out who failed! Shut up. We have police work to do. There are always enough social media theories, private citizens’ investigations into suspects, outright lies and misinformation being spread to the public, without silly partisan games sidetracking investigators who are fighting to stay ahead of legitimate theories and tips. In the early hours of a mass murder case investigators are probably the busiest they have ever been, and don’t need any of this interference. Controlling the social media fever is next to impossible. It would take a sudden level of maturity across the populace that may be unattainable. But politicians at all levels need to get the message that they are not welcome on stage at operational press conferences and their comments to the media – if asked for them – aside from expressing sadness, thoughts, prayers and confidence in the police, should be “Our law enforcement agencies are investigating, and we need to let them do what they do.” Adding any theories, raising questions or passing blame is totally wrong. If elected officials truly care about their electorate and feel the need to say more, they should have some prior dialogue with the police leaders or their Public Information Officers to ensure that what they say is helpful as opposed to harmful. Otherwise, be quiet.